Pro Tem Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, recently proposed a new tax for Connecticut homeowners, at least for those living in homes with a market value of over $ 430,000. It's known as a "mansion tax," which belies the fact that the middle Connecticut home is worth $ 359,000 (or was in 2019). With 1,500,000 housing units in the state, it means many people will see their property taxes rise, and Connecticut is already the third highest in the country in that regard.
The state is already stressed: high taxes, high property prices, high unemployment and a high population of government employees. Connecticut ranks 13th for state income tax. It is the twelfth most expensive state to buy a house in. As of December 2020, Connecticut's unemployment rate was 8.2% compared to 6.7% in the country. With 115 government employees per 10,000 residents, the state has more than twice as many as Florida (56) and almost twice as many as Georgia (68). These concerns have not gone unnoticed by a mobile population. During the five years between 2015 and 2020 in which the United States gained more than 10 million people, Connecticut lost about 30,000 residents. Unfunded public sector pension and health plan liabilities, if left untreated, will eventually bankrupt the state.
The Connecticut legislature and executive creatively seek more revenue to feed the animal they create. Many of their proposals, like sports betting and the legalization of pot, are indeed regressive as those who can least afford the cost bear the brunt. If this tax has a redeeming function, it is not regressive. However, as the tax is also applied to commercial buildings, consumers pay and consumption taxes are falling.
Most disheartening, however, is that lawmakers are making no effort to contain spending and making no effort to examine the long-term consequences of decisions aimed at giving voters something without asking for anything in return other than a vote . How far have we come since President Kennedy proclaimed, "Don't ask what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country."
The purpose of the government is not to find more and more sources of income. It is about protecting our inalienable rights, rights that are not granted by the government but that flow from our nature as a free and independent people – freedom to speak, pray, gather in protest, and own property . We are a society based on the rule of law that treats all people equally where justice is blind. If our founders had wanted a government that offered the cradle of serious security, they would not have created a government "by, through, and for the people." They would have given political leaders absolute power over a dependent people.
Like all new taxes, this is analogous to the camel that gets its nose under the tent. It won't stop at one mill per $ 1,000 of appraised value, and it won't be limited to "mansions" with an appraised value of over $ 300,000. Once switched on, control pins are not switched off. Now is the time to say no to Hartford.
Sydney M. Williams
Essex, CT